The fact that someone is dealing with an issue does not mean that their performance was good. It just means it might have been the best that could have been hoped for considering the issue they were dealing with.
What you are advocating for is akin to saying that because XYZ was a great hitter when he had two eyes, he is still a good hitter if he has lost an eye and now strikes 9 out of 10 times. The reality is he was a good hitter when he had two eyes, and now he is not. The fact that he is not is understandable, but it does not make him good now.
A more realistic example would be Diane Rehm. She is a wonderfully intelligent woman and a pretty good radio host. But her voice sounds like bones mashing around in a garbage disposal. The fact that she has spasmodic dysphonia makes it easy to understand why she has the voice that she does. But it does not make her voice beautiful or any easier to listen to on the radio.
Whether it was "her fault" is irrelevant to her performance in the movie. As is whether she "has" talent.
Agreed - but again - irrelevant to the performance in this movie. Also - Harrison Ford is a perfect rebuttal for this. He did a great job reprising a role as a swashbuckler despite looking like the old man he is. Han Solo lost his good looks, but not his charm.
Again - irrelevant to her performance in this film.
I don't dispute this.
Nope. Sorry to be a hardass on this stuff, but I grew up with a brother who was a child prodigy on the piano. He has more talent for playing the piano in one finger than most people have in their whole body, but he will be the first person to tell you that in the performing arts - the performance is everything. You can have all the talent in the world. You can practice all day and all night. You can do everything right. But if you flub the performance (for whatever reason) - the plain and simple truth is that it wasn't a good performance and you will have to deal with the fact that someone might not have liked it as a result.
Yeah but if your brother cant perform well they will just get another performer. However you aren't going to replace Leia with another actress, the fans would revolt if something like that would ever happen. So you are pretty much painted in a corner and she/they did the best they could with what they had. I suppose the point I'm trying to drive home is she did good considering the challenges that are presented. When she first hit the screen she was actually pretty silent except for the 1 sentence she said to Han. I asked my fiance if that is all the dialogue she was going to have because of her speech issue, thankfully it wasn't and she had a nice role. I wasn't making a case that she had a masterful performance. She didn't detract from the movie and I'm glad she was in it. Also on a side note, she looked great with the makeup and wardrobe. I give them a 10/10 on her look considering what they had to work with.
Complaining about her performance is nitpicking because of all the challenges involved. The only other option I see is not having her in the movie at all, and again the fans would riot.
I'm not picking on you. I've seen a lot of people complaining about the smallest of things and this one of those things that there was no better alternative, so why complain at all and just happy that it happened? Unless you thought her performance was so bad that it detracted from your experience. If that is the case then you will probably not enjoy 8 or 9 because she was probably be the only one that survives the trilogy from the old cast.